Search

Black and Latino voters support coethnic candidates at high rates in local elections. What is less clear is how Black and Latino voters respond to out-group candidates when they do not have the option to support a coethnic candidate. I posit that when race and ethnicity become salient in a campaign, endorsements from Black and Latino leaders and organizations increase support of out-group candidates among Blacks and Latinos. I find that this hypothesis is strongly supported among Blacks. However, the same is not true for Latinos, most likely because of the political heterogeneity of the group. Using data from a survey experiment, I show that Black endorsements of minority out-group candidates are persuasive for Blacks, while comparable endorsements from Latinos are not as influential among Latinos. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Researchers have argued that explicit racial appeals are rejected in contemporary American politics because they are perceived as violating the norm of racial equality. We test this claim with an experimental design, embedded in a representative survey of Georgia where, until recently, the state flag featured the Confederate battle emblem. In our experiment, we manipulate the salience of racial cues in news accounts of the state flag controversy in Georgia. We hypothesize that women are more likely than men to reject explicit racial appeals. We focus on the effects of explicit messages in two areas: support for Confederate symbols and identification with the Democratic Party. As hypothesized, when the racial significance of this debate is made explicit support for the Confederate flag declines, but only among women. Similarly, explicit appeals lead to lower levels of Democratic identification among men, but among women the effects are weaker and less consistent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]